An algebra for composing access control policies

ABSTRACT

Despite considerable advancements in the area of access control and authorization languages, current approaches to enforcing access control are all based on monolithic and complete specifications. This assumption is too restrictive when access control restrictions to be enforced come from the combination of different policy specifications, each possibly under the control of independent authorities, and where the specifics of some component policies may not even be known apriori. Turning individual specifications into a coherent policy to be fed into the access control system requires a nontrivial combination and translation process. This article addresses the problem of combining authorization specifications that may be independently stated, possibly in different languages and according to different policies. We propose an algebra of security policies together with its formal semantics and illustrate how to formulate complex policies in the algebra and reason about them. A translation of policy expressions into equivalent logic programs is illustrated, which provides the basis for the implementation of the algebra. The algebra's expressiveness is analyzed through a comparison with first-order logic.

REFERENCES

• 1: Martín Abadi , Leslie Lamport, Composing specifications, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.15 n.1, p.73-132, Jan. 1993 [doi>10.1145/151646.151649]
• 2: BANISAR, D. AND DAVIES, S. 1999. Privacy & Human Rights-An International Survey of Privacy Laws and Developments. EPIC.
• 3: Elisa Bertino , Sushil Jajodia , Pierangela Samarati, A flexible authorization mechanism for relational data management systems, ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), v.17 n.2, p.101-140, April 1999 [doi>10.1145/306686.306687]
• 4: Piero Bonatti , Sabrina de Capitani di Vimercati , Pierangela Samarati, A modular approach to composing access control policies, Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, p.164-173, November 01-04, 2000, Athens, Greece [doi>10.1145/352600.352623]
• 5: Ernesto Damiani , Sabrina de Capitani di Vimercati , Stefano Paraboschi , Pierangela Samarati, Design and implementation of an access control processor for XML documents, Proceedings of the 9th international World Wide Web conference on Computer networks : the international journal of computer and telecommunications netowrking, p.59-75, June 2000, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
• 6: GELFOND, M. AND LIFSCHITZ, V. 1988. The stable model semantics for logic programming. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Logic Programming (ICLP'88), MITPress, Cambridge, Mass., 1070-1080.
• 7: HOSMER, H. 1992. The multipolicy paradigm. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth National Computer Security Conference (Baltimore, Oct.), 409-422.
• 8: Trent Jaeger, Access control in configurable systems, Secure Internet programming: security issues for mobile and distributed objects, Springer-Verlag, London, 2001
• 9: Sushil Jajodia , Pierangela Samarati , Maria Luisa Sapino , V. S. Subrahmanian, Flexible support for multiple access control policies, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.26 n.2, p.214-260, June 2001 [doi>10.1145/383891.383894]
• 10: Paris C. Kanellakis, Elements of relational database theory, Handbook of theoretical computer science (vol. B): formal models and semantics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991
• 11: Carl E. Landwehr, Formal Models for Computer Security, ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), v.13 n.3, p.247-278, Sept. 1981 [doi>10.1145/356850.356852]
• 12: Ninghui Li , Joan Feigenbaum , Benjamin N. Grosof, A Logic-based Knowledge Representation for Authorization with Delegation, Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop, p.162, June 28-30, 1999
• 13: Vladimir Lifschitz , Hudson Turner, Splitting a logic program, Proceedings of the eleventh international conference on Logic programming, p.23-37, August 1994
• 14: J. W. Lloyd, Foundations of logic programming, Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, NY, 1984
• 15: LUNT, T. 1989. Access control policies for database systems. In Database Security II: Status and Prospects, C. Landwehr, Ed., North-Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 41-52.
• 16: Fausto Rabitti , Elisa Bertino , Won Kim , Darrell Woelk, A model of authorization for next-generation database systems, ACM Transactions on Database Systems (TODS), v.16 n.1, p.88-131, March 1991 [doi>10.1145/103140.103144]
• 17: SAGONAS, K., SWIFT, T., WARREN, D., FREIRE, J., AND RAO, P. 2000. The XSB programmer's manual, version 2.2. http://xsb.sourceforge.net.
• 18: Ravi S. Sandhu, Lattice-Based Access Control Models, Computer, v.26 n.11, p.9-19, November 1993 [doi>10.1109/2.241422]
• 19: HongHai Shen , Prasun Dewan, Access control for collaborative environments, Proceedings of the 1992 ACM conference on Computer-supported cooperative work, p.51-58, November 01-04, 1992, Toronto, Ontario, Canada [doi>10.1145/143457.143461]
• 20: STERLING, L. AND SHAPIRO, E. 1997. The Art of Prolog. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
• 21: SUBRAHMANIAN, V., ADALI, S., BRINK, A., EMERY, R., LU, J., RAJPUT, A., ROGERS, T., ROSS, R., AND WARD, C. 1997. Hermes: Heterogeneous reasoning and mediator system. http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/ hermes/publications/abstracts/hermes.html.
• 22: WOO, T. AND LAM, S. 1993. Authorizations in distributed systems: A new approach. J. Comput. Sec. 2, 2,3, 107-136.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.2 DATABASE MANAGEMENT
      H.2.7 Database Administration
          Subjects: Security, integrity, and protection

Additional Classification:
  K. Computing Milieux
  K.6 MANAGEMENT OF COMPUTING AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
      K.6.5 Security and Protection (D.4.6, K.4.2)

General Terms:
Design, Security

Keywords:
Access control, algebra, logic programs, policy composition